Warner Brothers fires James Gunn and Peter Safran as producers for their DC adaptations

Variety announced at least 2 prominent filmmakers have been fired from their positions as the overseers of the DC comics adaptatations:

In a surprise executive shuffle, James Gunn and Peter Safran are stepping down as CEOs and chairmen of DC Studios. They will be replaced by Jeremy Latcham, who will serve as president and chief creative officer.

Gunn and Safran’s exit is unexpected because they were named as part of David Ellison’s business leadership team at the newly renamed Skydance when Paramount’s $111 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery had closed in October. After four years as heads of DC, resetting the studio’s comic book division to mixed commercial results, Gunn and Safran will return full time to creative work.

Gunn and Safran were appointed in 2022 by former Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav, with an edict to fashion a true rival to Disney’s Marvel Cinematic Universe. Under their direction, the duo rebooted the languishing DC Universe with last summer’s “Superman,” a relative success with $618 million globally, and then stumbled with July’s “Supergirl,” a massive bomb with $126 million on a $170 million budget. “Clayface,” a darker, R-rated body-horror thriller, performed modestly this fall with $109 million on a $44 million budget. Meanwhile, they expanded the comic book empire to streaming with its “Peacemaker” and “Lanterns” shows for HBO Max.

I hope Clayface lost money, though you probably couldn't expect such a sorry trade journal to seriously admit it. But if Clayface was a success, that's awful, because it only ensures continuation of a genre that's taken up too much of the market, and at the expense of the comedy genre. And it gives a very bad feeling about what kind of audience we have attending such fare today.

But this certainly is impressive that, under Skydance ownership, Gunn and Safran have been given the dismissal notice they decidedly deserve. It's not like Gunn's Superman film has actually left something that people are talking about it all the time over a year after it first premiered. Let's also consider Gunn was originally fired from Marvel/Disney employ after it was discovered he'd written obscene jokes about sexual abuse on social media. That kind of repellence doesn't help matters. Also, the Lanterns TV show builds on leftist ideology, with the worst part being how a policewoman was scapegoated for Hal Jordan's demise in a live action program.

I guess now, it's a question of whether comics movies will start to gradually fade away? They fail to acknowledge the Marvel movieverse, as I call it, began to stumble at the end of the past decade when the Capt. Marvel movie premiered, and it's been mostly failures since, including the 4th Thor film. Perhaps if the movies and TV shows evaporated, we'd finally be able to get some focus on improving the artistic and financial fortunes of mainstream comicdom? We could only hope.

What some creators are saying about the USA midterm election

It's time to check what some of the farthest left creators think of the 2026 midterm election, which saw results sadly turn in their favor. For example, here's Kurt Busiek, who said, here, here, here and here:

What he says about Cruz is sick. And why does Busiek believe Trump literally doesn't want the GOP to be able to retain the White House? Also, over here:

I wonder why the "strategist" isn't named? Maybe fuel did play a part in the failure for the GOP, but anybody who's going to talk so crudely isn't making a good case regardless of where they stand, nor are they helping if they believe Iran's barbaric dictatorship should be allowed to continue standing. I guess that's why Busiek doesn't take issue with J.D. Vance, who's got some responsibilities to shoulder there. With the way Busiek continues to go about, that's why I won't be wasting any money today on his creator-owned GNs like Arrowsmith.

Then there's Ron Marz, who first re-posted the following items here and here from 2 left-wing news sources:

I think Marz's strongly implied favoratism for Abdul el-Sayed nullifies his attempt to use the New Republic's article as a claim the Republicans promote "ignorance". Next, he wrote the following here and here, and here, and here, which could give a clue where he stands on issues like illegal immigration, and another Republican politician:

So says somebody who acts like being a liberal means it's impossible to be ignorant. Look at what ICE nabbed in New York. That's not a serious issue? Once again, Marz proves quite a dreary bore, and I won't waste time on his creator owned books either.

There's also at least one from Gail Simone that's very chilling:

So she's all in for a Muslim politician who's taken disturbing positions on children, made statements hurtful to Israel, and even keeps books on his shelves containing verses hurtful to Black Africans? Shudder. This definitely explains what's wrong with Simone, and I will not read any of her creator-owned writings.

In addition, there's also a puff piece on Forbes about a GN they claim might've turned North Carolina blue, and the people involved are perhaps unsurprising choices:

One of the most creative responses came from Andrew Aydin, co-writer of John Lewis’s best-selling graphic novel memoir series March, who had moved to the region and was caught up in the disaster and recovery effort. Aydin recognized that the community needed more than money to rebuild what it had lost. It needed to tell its stories, to be dignified and recognized for what its people had gone through. So he organized the Appalachia Comics Project as a way to get those stories to as large an audience as possible.

“Comics and graphic novels can help dramatize conflicts,” said Aydin in a call earlier this week. “They can help show the reality of horrible situations in a way that brings people together.”

Aydin spearheaded a unique project to pair members of the community with top comic book industry professionals like Brian Michael Bendis, Matt Fraction, Steve Orlando and Gene Luen Yang to produce an anthology of personal narratives about the storm and its impact. He launched a crowdfunding campaign to cover production costs, and Islands in the Sky was published in September, 2026.

Bendis' name alone is enough to make me leery, considering how repellent his stories for Marvel and DC were. I don't know if this GN actually helped politically, but anybody who's going to hire such overrated, pretentious scribes as Bendis and company is not making a good impressive of themselves.

One of the saddest things about all these leftists in the comics industry has to be that they never change, and these statements of theirs are another example of how they remain the same.

More about what's wrong with the new Avatar cartoon

A writer at the Daily Wire tells more about what's wrong with the picture in the new Avatar sequel, Seven Havens. For example, the reviewer, who's of Korean descent, feels it throws out Chinese cultural heritage:

The original Avatar built civilizations. The new one is more interested in rebuilding them around Hollywood’s contemporary liberal sensibilities and commitment to “diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

Discarding Cultural Heritage

Fast-forward roughly 225 years after “The Legend of Korra.” An environmental apocalypse, which Avatar Korra herself supposedly caused, has wiped out the four nations. Humanity huddles in seven city-states (“havens”). The new Avatar is Pavi, a 9-year-old orphan who turns out to share the title with her twin sister, Nisha. They live in a haven called Ellora, named after the Ellora Caves in India.

The leads are South Asian, and even the iconic intro sequence is fundamentally different. As one account observed: “They took away the Chinese characters of each element … and replaced them with element symbols … surrounded by Hindu chakra symbols.” I’m aware the word avatar comes from Sanskrit, and South Asian religious traditions influenced the original series. The issue here isn’t cultural inclusion or influence; it’s cultural continuity. Expanding an established fictional universe doesn’t require dismantling the identity it already possessed. East Asians replaced by South Asians? Brits and Greeks replaced by sub-Saharan Africans? A win for diversity and representation. An all-white cast or a white man plays Goku in “Dragonball Evolution”? You committed the gravest of sins. Race-swaps only ever go in one direction.

While building on Indian influences in and of themselves can surely have potential, what ruins it is that they also build on LGBT ideology, which isn't approved of in India. And the reviewer's right, they don't have to throw out other cultural aspects just to emphasize the new ones. Ironically, I doubt they have any respect for China save for perhaps the communism dominating the country for nearly 8 decades now. Maybe that could explain why they got rid of any such influences from earlier entries. I also doubt they have any respect for Indian culture either, despite the suggestions to the contrary. That aside, it's got to be telling if they make Korra look bad, as though that particular cartoon wasn't in questionable enough taste already as it is.

Then there’s the show’s moral vision. At New York Comic Con, co-executive producer and head writer Sehaj Sethi said this: “There are no villains in the story. There are protagonists and antagonists. Everyone has a side and a point of view.”

Yeah, no wonder the writing flounders. No one has a problem with morally complicated characters. The original Avatar was full of them, such as Zuko, who wrestled through guilt, loyalty, and shame to reach redemption. But Zuko’s redemption only meant something because Fire Lord Ozai, his father, was evil. Ozai wasn’t simply a misunderstood man with an alternative perspective; he was an evil tyrant who scarred his own son.

Moral complexity is not the absence of moral truth. Good and evil are real, and you can never tell a compelling story about good overcoming evil if evil is merely an abstraction based on someone’s subjective perspective. The stated ambition of the “Seven Havens” creators to avoid villains altogether risks replacing moral conviction with endless relativism. A story where everyone has a point of view, but nobody is truly wrong, quickly becomes a story where nothing really matters.

Sounds like they're trying to mimic Hayao Miyazki's films, and worst, emphasize moral equivalence. What's there to find in that? All that does is make a mockery out of the whole concept of good vs. evil.

Then, on schedule, comes another familiar development. In the third episode, male airbender Jae reveals his boyfriend, a guard named Datu. The two embrace and share a kiss, and entertainment outlets quickly celebrated them as the franchise’s first on-screen gay couple. Jae’s voice actor called it “a wonderful exemplification of love is love.” Woke isn’t dead; it’s more alive than ever. And Hollywood is still obsessed with introducing this to families and children.

Swap out the cultures. Remove the villains. Add the representation checklist. My shorthand for this has always been gay race communism, and here it is in animated form.

And it's not even new at this point, recalling the Arthur cartoon also shoved it in. Avatar's unlikely at this point to find a good place in history as a cartoon that could give anybody something solid to think about, and removing differences between good and bad - to say nothing of possibly validating bad ideologies - only makes this all the more an embarrassment.

Comics Journal justifies Miller's defeatism

The Comics Journal recently reviewed Frank Miller's new biography, Push the Wall, and in their typical left-wing fashion, declare his 2011 graphic novel Holy Terror a mistake, which, of course, is what he's also been doing for several years now:

He doesn't shy away from addressing failure. He discusses Robocop 2 and Holy Terror, which was a potentially career-ending nadir to his journey. I agree with Miller's assertion that we learn more from our mistakes than our triumphs. "Never forget: failure is your friend." A more detailed discussion of those failures as well as Miller's aforementioned solo directorial debut on The Spirit would have been welcome. While Robocop 2 and The Spirit seem to be forgotten, backlash from Holy Terror continues to this day, though it has greatly lessened since Miller has publicly disavowed the book and chalks it up to a bad decision made during a low point of his life. "It was a fever." Miller has said in recent interviews promoting this book that he eventually realized that propaganda ranks just below pornography as an art form. Perhaps the accumulated backlash he's undergone explains why Miller is so reserved in this book. He's apparently abandoned the dangerous role of provocateur.

So they're saying he was once just that? I don't know if he was a "provocateur", but I do know there was a time when he seemingly once looked over serious issues, and if he decided since to no longer do that, it's very troubling as it's appalling and defeatist. The reviewer also says:

Even something as heartless and life-negating as American Capitalism doesn’t expect its workers to produce at the top of their abilities past the age of 60. He regrets that he "got really comfortable by the pools and on the barstools of Los Angeles" during his lost Hollywood weekend, but aside from the barstools, maybe that was an astoundingly good use of his time. Looking back now at the vantage point of mid-career I certainly wish I’d spent more of my days poolside. There’s nothing on Earth quite like a Miller Masterwork. Fortunately for him, Miller learned the lesson that he quotes from Bruce Lee: "The process is everything, the outcome is nothing." Another bromide, but a useful one nonetheless.

So they couldn't resist deriding capitalism simultaneously. Well, I guess we couldn't expect much else from such an otherwise dismaying periodical. What's Miller even done to prove he truly respects Will Eisner as a mentor? All I know is that Miller talks too much while helping little. Interesting they say he still receives backlash for writing Holy Terror, because that was the case in Britain when the Thought Bubble convention disinvited him, yet he never seemed to challenge it. The problem, of course, is that he doesn't have the courage to distance himself from his ultra-leftist colleagues, if they're more than willing to throw him under the bus over a GN whose premise they don't agree with. Did it ever occur to the reviewer that he's only furthering the "backlash" when he parrots the claim Holy Terror in itself was inherently wrong? No, what's wrong is if Miller didn't have the courage to explore what the Koran builds on, and I suppose that's why guys like him end up having "liberal guilt". But that's no excuse or substitute for actual failure, which was his apparent disinterest in researching anything vital.

If his Push the Wall biography emphasizes this kind of defeatism the reviewer speaks of, that's decidedly another reason why there's no point in wasting money buying it. Miller's regrettably the kind of leftist who doesn't have what it takes to stand his ground on what stories he writes up, and simultaneously, he doesn't have what it takes to write and illustrate a story building on more optimistic premises. Those are some of his biggest weaknesses, and above all, what was the point of producing a documentary about his career when most of what he's written other than Daredevil is hardly worth it anyway?

A project to examine classic comics that could soon be entering public domain

Indiana Public Media reports the state university's Luddy School is working on a study project for older comics:

Indiana University’s Luddy School of Informatics, Computing and Engineering and Michigan State University are collaborating on a project that will create digital scholarly editions for early American comic books.

It’s a two-year project funded through a $65,000 award from the National Endowment for the Humanities. IU Luddy professor and the project’s lead researcher John Walsh said this project is for creating prototype editions. This will allow them to document the process, have a manual and have a prototype web system for the next phase.

When this project is completed, they will apply for a full implementation grant to start building and publishing five to six scholarly editions of early American comic books. This project and the following one will take five years. Walsh said if all goes well they could continue their work, which will be available to the public. [...]

Focusing on early American comic books is because many of them will be entering the public domain with their copyright expiring in the next five to 10 years. The motivation is also the cultural history and significance early comics have. [...]

There are several genres of comics: children comics, romance comics, science fiction comics, war comics, superhero comics and more.

For example, many war comics were created by writers and artists who served in the military in World War II, or other wars, so understanding that aspect can help readers understand the significance of the content in the comics, Walsh said.

History of subjects like these could help new generations learn why they were considered so important in their time, and a serious focus is needed in comics on why communism was considered a bad ideology in the past century, what its totalitarian structure led to, and why it's still a serious problem today. Why, even the early James Bond films could make a great learning source for modern students, since they tackled the Cold War themes of the times, and when Stan Lee launched Marvel's Silver Age, he also wrote up metaphors for communism, as did some DC contributors of the times.

And on the subject of creations entering public domain, I hope there'll be good people who're willing to develop stories with entertainment and educational value when the time comes. After all the misuse in the past quarter century at the Big Two, when their products enter public domain, it'll be a blessing.

Las Vegas festival is Batman-themed

The Las Vegas Review Journal spoke about their local specialty convention, whose latest setup, wouldn't you know it, takes the predictable modern route of using a superhero whose foremost theme is the dark, and a miniseries whose characterization for its star became almost entirely mandatory over the following decade or so:

It was a blockbuster that lived up to its title in more ways than one.

In 1986, DC Comics published Frank Miller’s “The Dark Knight Returns,” which hit the industry with a Batman-worthy ka-pow!

At the time, Batman was seen as so passe that his future was in jeopardy, as Stephen King wrote in the foreword to the 400th issue of the comic, in which he acknowledged that he once feared that the superhero would become a “character who had simply slipped away into the quiet hall of obscurity.”

“The Dark Knight Returns,” which King called “probably the finest piece of comic art ever to be published in a popular edition,” changed all that and then some. Not only was it a huge hit with the comic book crowd, but it was carried — and sold well — in actual bookstores.

“‘The Dark Night Returns’ made Batman an iconic, relevant figure again,” says Joe Keatinge, writer and editor-in-chief of “Comics! The Magazine.” “Breathed new life into it.”

Really! What they're saying, in other words, is that, no matter how dark and jarringly violent the stories of the 1970s were when Denny O'Neil and Steve Englehart were leading writers, it didn't help the Masked Manhunter's fortunes in the long run, if at all. Only Miller succeeded in boosting fortunes for the series. This is just plain insulting to the intellect, because, although this article does reference at least 2 more items of note, it doesn't mention any other artists and writers like Chuck Dixon. If he wasn't a guest at this convention because of his conservative credentials, that can be telling something too.

That title, along with successive hits such as “Batman: Killing Joke” and “Batman: Arkham Asylum,” proved to be game changers, ushering in a new era in which comics and graphic novels were increasingly — and legitimately — seen as literature, reaching a whole new audience.

It's so annoying how select writers and titles are cited as the reason the medium supposedly gained wider recognition, mainly because these kind of news reports are curiously omissive of brighter angles like Superman's. As for the Killing Joke special, I wonder why we're not told the plot or premise? It involved Barbara Gordon, the former Batgirl, being crippled by the Joker, and perhaps the most disturbing part of production is that, as told by Daily Grindhouse, both Dick Giordano and Len Wein as editors said "go ahead and cripple the b****" to Alan Moore before he began writing it. It's chilling to think, what if they used the C-slur to describe Babs? And then, while Killing Joke may not have originally been intended as canon, they pretty much made it so soon after, recalling a 1990 issue of Suicide Squad was probably the first place where Babs could be seen in her new wheelchair-bound role. It may have led to a great role in Birds of Prey 8 years later. But the way the editors in charge went about it was disgusting, and you can't blame anybody who may believe that's why the door should be left open for Babs to return to a walking role in the years after. It's just a shame that, by the time it occurred in the late 2000s, it was far too late, and was ruined along with plenty of other items by crossovers like Identity Crisis and Infinite Crisis.

One of the hosts of the festival is Joe Keatinge, said to be an artist/writer who's worked at Marvel and Image, and he said:

Keatinge will also present a talk on “The Comic Roots of Batman,” in which he’ll trace the evolution of the character from his noir-inspired origins into a brooding Hollywood antihero.

A scene lifer who’s written for Marvel Comics and Image Comics, worked as co-editor of “Popgun” and more, Keatinge has seen firsthand how the comic world has grown in recent decades.

“The industry has caught up with the potential of the art form,” he says. “In practical terms, what we’ve seen since the early 2000s and late ’90s is a major push of comics in schools and in libraries. And so specific titles like Raina Telgemeier’s ‘Smile,’ Jeff Smith’s ‘Bone,’ Dav Pilkey’s ‘Dog Man,’ and ‘Captain Underpants’ built a generation that was used to comics.

“They had exposure to comics at the places that they were being educated,” he continues. “And then grew up and they started going to Barnes & Noble with Mom and Dad, they saw manga, and it had a variety of stories that were much more mature than the ones they were reading. Now, all those people are in their 20s and they can go to comic book stores and seek out the work that’s there.” “I think we’re in for a very interesting five to 10 years in comics,” he predicts. “I really feel like we’re just at the beginning of an era of what I hope will be expansion.”

Oh, I'm sure of that. But what about the Big Two? How well are they going to fare with the way things are going? Even Batman's lost its luster long ago, and they won't admit it. They won't even get into how the 2004 War Games event, and subsequent War Crimes, were some of the worst storylines the Masked Manhunter and cast were put through. And if sales figures matter, I found this item on the site of a writer named R.S Martin, who says the following about DKR:

DC Comics saw its fortunes turn around. Writer-artist Frank Miller's Batman: The Dark Knight, a four-issue limited series in an upscale format--the $2.95 cover price for an issue was almost four times the industry's 75¢ standard--became the sensation of the field. The sales of the series are unknown, although the individual issues are believed to have sold over 300,000 copies each. The end of the spring saw the debut of Watchmen, a 12-issue series by scriptwriter Alan Moore and artist Dave Gibbons, that is believed to have had average per-issue sales of over 200,000. The summer saw the long-awaited revamp of Superman, by writer-artist John Byrne, in the six-issue limited series The Man of Steel. The average sales of each issue is believed to have been in the mid-to-high hundred-thousands.

If this is correct, is that something to truly marvel at? Sorry, but no matter the merit, the answer is "no". So why are we being lectured that DKR, and also Watchmen, were such a big deal? It's plain stupid to tell all this without citing any sales figures or doing hard research.

As for where the industry goes in the coming decade, that remains to be seen. When it comes to independent comics, there can be potential if serious talent is involved. But assuming DC/Marvel are still around then, how will they fare under the same expectations? That's exactly why they don't belong under a conglomerate anymore, and if Skydance Corp, as the new owner of Warner Brothers, has no intention of overseeing improvements and jettisoning the worst DC turned out in the past quarter century, I'm not sure why we have to expect anything good to come from the purchase this year.

Since we're on the subject of conventions/festivals, here's also a report from the Daily Bruin about the LA comicon, where some attendants brought up the worries about AI's influence:

A major concern for Callibur, she added, is the use of artificial intelligence within the comic industry. She said the community generally is worried about AI but also recognizes that AI cannot replicate what it does. Concept designer Gary Montalbano said he noticed people really appreciate human-made work.

“Artwork, writing – what you’re doing is communicating to another human how you’re feeling,” Montalbano said. “It (AI) is just a prediction. … it’s the rise of mediocrity.”

Yes, but it's vital to consider that comicdom fell into artistic mediocrity and worse over 2 decades ago. The same paper also noted how Hollywood movies continue to be too much focus at the convention, and that's why these festivals could be considered outmoded at this point if they won't scale back their focus and make sure the original topics aren't obscured for the sake of too much Hollywood.

Speaking of which, I'm tired of all this constant focus on Batman at the expense of heroes like Superman, and that's something that has to change too. It doesn't mean I'm not a fan of Batman. Quite the opposite. But I still find it utterly appalling how darkness is made into such a big deal, especially if the same advocates aren't interested in emphasizing challenging issues despite all suggestions to the contrary.

Supposedly groundbreaking webcomic called Worm adapted by IDW

Gizmodo announced a webcomic serial called Worm is being turned into more official comics format by IDW:

io9 is thrilled to share the news of Worm‘s first-ever physical release from IDW Publishing, with a creative team that includes writer Meghan Fitzmartin, artist Javier Ortiz, colorist David Vaquero, and letterer Andriy Lukin, as well as McCrae aboard as a consultant.

It makes sense given Worm‘s comic book-ready subject matter, as McCrae explained in a statement provided to io9.

“Worm came about as an attempt to bring superheroes and supervillains, designed as they are for the visual medium of comics, to the printed word. Here, we bring it full circle,” said McCrae. “In talking to IDW, it was refreshing that they knew the work, that they shared many of my thoughts and ideas for updating and revising the work, and that they saw the potential for Worm. I look forward to working with them and have high hopes as we bring Worm into the comics realm.”

Gee, that doesn't sound so original, considering superhero tales were first in the printed word and visual alike almost a century ago. Where does he get off telling something so superficial?

Here’s what the Worm comic is about:

“After enduring a brutal and bloody bullying scandal, Taylor finally has the power to fight back: With her newly triggered ability to control insects, she could prove everyone wrong and become a hero… or kill anyone who stands in her way.”

“In a world of superpowered gang members, fanatical cults, and ruthless serial killers, Taylor must navigate the dangerous politics and unwritten rules of the local ‘cape’ scene, where the line between hero and villain is anything but clear. For Taylor, perhaps, least of all. Will she risk everything to save others, or use her power to exact revenge on those who’ve wronged her?”

Doesn't sound like anything I haven't heard before. When they blur the lines between good and bad, that's an open signal this isn't bound to be a serious focus on the battle of the former to stop the latter, but rather, cheap sensationalism with insects as a plot device.

“I’m so excited and honored to work on Worm with some of the best folks in comics. I came to Worm late in the game, but I was immediately enthralled by the amazing, vibrant world John has built,” Fitzmartin said. “A story about complicated women, people with powers, feminine rage, and folks trying to do the right thing… with varying results? Sign me the fuck up. Javier and David pack a powerhouse of a punch onto every page, giving Worm the brutal, tempestuous love Taylor, Armsmaster, and the Undersiders deserve.”

What, is this supposed to be a metaphor for feminist ideology?!? I don't know, but if it's about the likelihood the lead's going to kill people, that only sullies everything, and what's so vibrant about a story built on bloody violence anyway?

Also note who one of the main editors of Worm happens to be:

Added IDW executive editor Heather Antos, “Worm is such a fresh and compelling take on the superhero genre, challenging what it means to be a hero or a villain, and whether right and wrong are always so black and white when you’re fighting for what you believe is good. Getting to collaborate with series creator John McCrae to bring this incredible world to comics with IDW is an absolute thrill, and it’s especially exciting that this project came to IDW through series editor and IDW associate editor Cassandra Jones, whose own personal connection to the story first introduced us to it, and the team has already done an excellent job bringing the characters to the comics page.”

And of course, the editor of this comic is somebody who proved quite a moral hypocrite when she worked at Marvel, and Valiant. What she says about right and wrong is fishy too, another reason to avoid this indie project. To think, that IDW would "rebuild" themselves centering around crude, cliched thrillers like this is just sad. And where do they get the money from to continue publishing anyway?

There's nothing groundbreaking about Worm. It's another demonstration of why we need more creators proving they can give focus to something brighter and more inspiring.